R.R.RASTOGI, J. - (1.) IN compliance with the direction of this Court, the IT Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "D", Delhi, hereafter referred to as "the Tribunal" has referred the following question for the opinion of this Court under S. 27(3) of the WT Act : "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in upholding the AAC's action in directing that the penalty under S. 18(1)(a) of the WT Act, 1957, should be imposed on the basis of the scale in force prior to the Finance Act, 1969 ?"
(2.) THE reference relates to the asst. yrs. 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69. The assessee, an individual, should have filed the return of wealth tax for these years by 30th June, 1966, 30th June, 1967 and 30th June, 1968, respectively. He however, filed the returns for these years on 1st Nov., 1974. The WTO initiated proceedings under S. 18(1)(a) of the Act and after considering the explanation of the assessee levied penalty in sums of Rs. 39,100 Rs. 71,016, and Rs. 38,152 for the aforesaid three years, respectively. It may be mentioned that the penalty was worked out at the rate of 0.5 per cent of the net wealth for every month constituting the period of delay beginning from the due date till the date on which the return was filed for these years. The assessee appealed. The AAC upheld the levy of penalty but took the view that the amount of penalty should have been computed for each year on the basis of the law obtaining as on the date of default. In view of the amendment introduced by the Finance Act, 1969, w.e.f. 1st April, 1969, the levy of penalty was to be at the rate of 0.5 per cent of the net wealth for every month constituting the period of default while the law prevailing in the years concerned provided for levy of penalty at 2 per cent of the tax for each month of default, subject to the maximum of 50 per cent of the tax. Accordingly, the AAC reduced the amounts of penalty to Rs. 195, Rs. 204 and Rs. 251 respectively.
(3.) THE Department filed appeal from that decision before the Tribunal. The Tribunal agreed with the view taken by the AAC and confirmed his orders. Now, at the instance of the Department, the question mentioned above has been referred to this Court.;